Go to page

Go to page

Do you know how ridiculous it is to talk about true love to a female slave who was struggling for survival and constantly under threat of abuse? Of course it is not true love, but did she need true love? All she wanted was more and better food, a better shelter, no or less back-breaking work, less violent rape by her captors. If any master could give her that, she would be grateful to and grow to like that master. She would feel attached to and fear for being abandoned by that master, and may want to return favor with her body.

You guys are all making assumptions. There is only 2 things we know:
-She had a son by Cortez
-In the sources from around that time (both Indian and Spanish) she is depicted as someone important.

Now you can make a lot of assumptions about how the dynamics were, but we simply don't know. It may be that she was forced by Cortez, it may be that she genuinely loved him. It may be that Cortez fell in love and she only tolerated him, it may be that she hated the Aztecs and would do anything to take revenge, etc

Point of the matter is that for a supposedly mass-murdering, raping war criminal, it is a bit thin to only come up with "well, he may have raped La Malinche".

Further point of the matter is that it certainly wasn't Cortez that routinely sacrificed people and sometimes even ate them.
In the whole of south America, the Aztecs probably were the sickest ****s at that time.

You guys are all making assumptions. There is only 2 things we know:
-She had a son by Cortez
-In the sources from around that time (both Indian and Spanish) she is depicted as someone important.
In the whole of south America, the Aztecs probably were the sickest ****s at that time.

Yes, I agree. We know too little about their real relationship. It's better not to make too many assumptions. In my post I was just telling @TillyCaine that there are many things more important than true love for a female slave of that time, so @TillyCaine should not focus on true love.

Yes, I agree. We know too little about their real relationship. It's better not to make too many assumptions. In my post I was just telling @TillyCaine that there are many things more important than true love for a female slave of that time, so @TillyCaine should not focus on true love.

Did you know her? So you must be very very old.... Did you live in Technotichtlán when Cortes and Malinche appeared there or did you travel next Don Bernal? because you write as if you met them!!! "not true love"...love dear friend change with time! what you named "love" was invented by Walt Disney Production in 20th Century... well it is the Bourgois Love invented in 19 Century! not matched with love before Industrial Revolution.
"more and better food".. how do you know? "better shelter".. Did you know how was the Manliche´s shelter in 1507?

I was replying @TillyCaine, telling her that there are many things more important than true love for a female slave of that time. Maybe I shouldn't have made those assumptions, but that's what I imagine should be a slave's primary concerns. Maybe I should not be commenting in this thread because I am not familiar with North American history. I'd better go back to Asian history section.

I don't say the Aztec were savages. The entirety of history does. They sacrificed individuals in the tens of thousands just to dedicate a temple. They started wars where the only point was to capture prisoners to later sacrifice. They ate the bodies of those they sacrificed.

This was part of your earlier "woke" rant:

"In the case of Cortes, the Aztec Empire and other native American tribes had done nothing to them. They lived peacefully in North America for thousands of years before arrival of the European colonists."

This is a very ridiculous post. I can see how you might get a standing ovation for making it in a typical liberal arts college but its about the least historical statement you could have made without adding the Easter Bunny or aliens into it.

How in the world did you get it into your head that the Aztecs had lived peacefully with any of their neighbors? Ignorance of actual history? Or just ignoring it because the truth was less appealing than the version you wanted, which was "evil male capitalistic patriarchal imperialism!"

Was La Malinche a slave when she was given to Cortes? According to historical sources, yes. Who enslaved her. THE MAYAN. Was she a slave AFTER Cortes accepted her? No, historical sources show that he not only freed her, she became his most trusted adviser and his long time lover, given the honorific title of Dona/Lady, held in high esteem by Spanish and Mexican alike. There is zero evidence, beyond your imagination and bias, she was raped. Or that she was treated poorly. Or with disrespect.

The locals already practiced slavery. Spanish didn't enslave the population, they specifically had laws that forced them to look out for well being of the locals. Were they perfect? Nope, not by a long shot. After all, they were only there to reap the benefits to gain precious metals and other rare and expensive natural resources. But the Spanish were absolutely nothing in comparison to the previous regional power, the Aztecs.

I don't say the Aztec were savages. The entirety of history does. They sacrificed individuals in the tens of thousands just to dedicate a temple. They started wars where the only point was to capture prisoners to later sacrifice. They ate the bodies of those they sacrificed.

This was part of your earlier "woke" rant:

"In the case of Cortes, the Aztec Empire and other native American tribes had done nothing to them. They lived peacefully in North America for thousands of years before arrival of the European colonists."

This is a very ridiculous post. I can see how you might get a standing ovation for making it in a typical liberal arts college but its about the least historical statement you could have made without adding the Easter Bunny or aliens into it.

How in the world did you get it into your head that the Aztecs had lived peacefully with any of their neighbors? Ignorance of actual history? Or just ignoring it because the truth was less appealing than the version you wanted, which was "evil male capitalistic patriarchal imperialism!"

Was La Malinche a slave when she was given to Cortes? According to historical sources, yes. Who enslaved her. THE MAYAN. Was she a slave AFTER Cortes accepted her? No, historical sources show that he not only freed her, she became his most trusted adviser and his long time lover, given the honorific title of Dona/Lady, held in high esteem by Spanish and Mexican alike. There is zero evidence, beyond your imagination and bias, she was raped. Or that she was treated poorly. Or with disrespect.

The locals already practiced slavery. Spanish didn't enslave the population, they specifically had laws that forced them to look out for well being of the locals. Were they perfect? Nope, not by a long shot. After all, they were only there to reap the benefits to gain precious metals and other rare and expensive natural resources. But the Spanish were absolutely nothing in comparison to the previous regional power, the Aztecs.

You have no evidence of that. Its purely your opinion, completely without evidence. For all you know she could have earned her freedom simply by the goodwill of Cortes. Or by her intellect. Or after she was converted to Christianity. Either way, you assume she was raped. You assume she needed to gain her freedom using sex.

What is with you? You seriously think so little of the female sex that they cannot succeed in life without their genitalia being involved? You have some serious hangups about sex, and even more about the field of study known as history.

Historum

Founded in 2006, Historum is a history forum dedicated to history discussions and historical events. Our community welcomes everyone from around the world to discuss world history, historical periods, and themes in history - military history, archaeology, arts and culture, and history in books and movies.